Re:Twitter still hasn't unlocked the New York Post's account
by koolba on Monday October 26, 2020 @03:13PM
(#24900012)
Nothing in your comment says the information is fake or false. In fact, the Biden campaign and his son Hunter have not denied any of the information either.
Given that Twitter has allowed people to publish anything and everything about Trump regardless of source (or lack thereof), this is a clear cut case of bias to push their preferred candidate.
A different take on the same idea, Google now adds "fact checks" when searching for videos of Biden, in his own words, describing his flip flopping position on fracking. Try it for yourself: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=biden+fracking
I'd love to know what other fact checks they've added. I can't find an explicit list. I submitted an Ask HN to see if anyone knew how to get that list. But that post was flagged as some people may feel that information is too dangerous to disclose.
Both actions are clearly driven by bias. Whether they're allowed to do it on a private platform is a separate topic. But you can't claim to be for free speech when the only speech you suppress or "clarify" is that which is negative to your candidate of choice.
Given that Twitter has allowed people to publish anything and everything about Trump regardless of source (or lack thereof), this is a clear cut case of bias to push their preferred candidate.
A different take on the same idea, Google now adds "fact checks" when searching for videos of Biden, in his own words, describing his flip flopping position on fracking. Try it for yourself: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=biden+fracking
I'd love to know what other fact checks they've added. I can't find an explicit list. I submitted an Ask HN to see if anyone knew how to get that list. But that post was flagged as some people may feel that information is too dangerous to disclose.
Both actions are clearly driven by bias. Whether they're allowed to do it on a private platform is a separate topic. But you can't claim to be for free speech when the only speech you suppress or "clarify" is that which is negative to your candidate of choice.